In RPI games I see emotes and says done in one of two ways: 1. Everyone says what they want to say when they want to say it, and they emote when they want to emote, or 2. Everyone emotes or says something when it's their turn to do so. In the latter case, thoughtlessly skipping turns makes people mad.

The first way is how role play is done in most RPI games I've played. I've only seen the second way done in two or three RPI games.

Taking turns seems to me to require a lot of waiting. People take their time coming up with highly descriptive poses, and I've waited as long as 45 minutes to have a second turn. To hear it from people in these games, NO ONE does the first way and they can only imagine that kind of role play to be highly disorganized and impossible to follow. Aside from the waiting, taking turns seems to make it easier to leave new people out of a scene as the subsequent players are not obligated to acknowledge the new players if they don't want to (which I discussed elsewhere).

I prefer the first method because a lot of communication can be done in a short time. It is highly efficient, and emotes color scenes when they are used to their full potential, or, at the very least, tell others exactly what a character is doing. People also do not have to think up long, prosaic emotes for each turn they have. It also leads to greater immersion as players waiting for their turns end up doing other things (filing taxes, writing the Next Great Novel, getting something to drink, etc.) while they wait.

In both styles, emoting (posing) as someone enters a room is very helpful (usually done in style 1, required by law in style 2) for providing details of a scene to newcomers (that is, newbies and otherwise).

I've seen and played both. Generally, most people consider a mud "more RP focused" if people are required or strongly encouraged to sit and take turns, round-robin style, typing very well-thought out, descriptive, 4-6 line poses, and less RP focused if people just spit out one-liners using the "say" and "emote" commands most of us are familiar with from most mud codebases.

The turn taking system ensures that everybody is involved and gets to participate if they want, and gives everybody sufficient time to type out whatever showy descriptive material they want. And it's organized. Nobody gets overlooked that way, and everyone feels a collaborative spirit of having their moment in the spotlight and building a scene together in a very RP focused environment. But you're stuck waiting 45 minutes in a crowded room to finally get your turn to type something, and three quarters of the prose you read doesn't actually advance the scene or communicate all that much. Five lines about how a person moves when he or she walks and his or her facial expression, and one line of actual conversation, that you waited 15 minutes for the other person to post gets unreal. You spent 15 minutes of your real life advancing a fictional mud conversation 30 seconds.

The freeform system is fast, flexible, and lets people focus on content rather than describing everything. It's great for less wordy players who would rather be judged by what their character says, does, and is like than their skills as a writer as they try to describe details that they haven't thought about and don't add all that much to the scene. After all, playing a mud is more like acting in a play than writing a book. You should be playing your role, not writing a story. So thing happen fast, nobody's stuck waiting for their turn, and nobody's stuck reading or writing an entire paragraph of description to speak a sentence. But not everybody feels included when people run in, run out, talk over them, and don't take the time to appreciate their nuances (or write nuances of their own to be appreciated). Very "serious" roleplayers feel like this style glosses over a lot of the opportunities for roleplaying and makes everything feel more like a shallow game and less like a deeply immersive RP experience.

It's a royal pain in the butt in either method to have to immediately drop what you're doing and type something out so some guy who just walked in knows what's taking place. Some muds have a character position/status command that lets you at least set the scene a little bit by changing the text people see when they enter, (e.g., someone entering would see people's names followed by a settable string of text: "Acacia stands at the north end of the street, leaning against the wall of the smithy with his arms folded across his chest, speaking to Snowtroll <next line> Snowtroll squats at the north end of the street in front of the smithy, pooping in front of Acacia , because in serious RP muds, people have to go to the bathroom, and in really serious RP muds, people don't take a break from RP for any reason including pooping")

In my experience turn-taking seems to be more popular on mushes, and freeform on RPIs. I don't know how it started but I'm guessing it's because it's easier to interleave coded commands on RPIs when the RP style is freeform. Most mushes have fewer coded commands to deal with.

I admit I get frustrated by the '10 line pose saying nothing' style of RP. Of course you don't always get that, some people are amazing writers. But, especially when there are four or more people in the mix, people seem to forget that to advance a scene you don't really need to do much more than 'the next obvious thing'. People seem to avoid that for some reason, I guess they think it's boring or unimaginative. But I'd rather move the scene than wait a half hour for a (possibly) imaginative pose.

In RPI games I see emotes and says done in one of two ways: 1. Everyone says what they want to say when they want to say it, and they emote when they want to emote, or 2. Everyone emotes or says something when it's their turn to do so. In the latter case, thoughtlessly skipping turns makes people mad.

The first way is how role play is done in most RPI games I've played. I've only seen the second way done in two or three RPI games.

I think you're confusing game styles. RPIs are not turn-based. Your last paragraph indicates that you've played tried several RPIs - but there aren't several RPIs. There are only a few in existence. I think at last count, there were 5. RPI is an actual game designation - not a description of a type of roleplay. Although it doesn't identify a codebase, it does identify specific criteria; turn-based roleplay is not among that list of criteria.

Also, RPIs have no levels, death is permanent, and you don't kill mobs just because mobs exist. You kill mobs only if your character has some need to kill them. Such as - he's a hunter gathering skins for his crafting girlfriend. Or he's a paid mercenary escorting a group through dangerous terrain and protects them from the aggressive mobs that get in their way. Or you're learning how to kill creatures for those types of reasons, and need something to practice on, so you kill some less dangerous things, and sell their skins and meat and body parts in the markets, which gives you coin to afford food and water so you can continue thriving and ultimately achieve your goal.

In other words, the code exists so that players can work their characters into believable in-character goals; not so that characters can level up or get RPPs or stat boosts.

So if what you've been trying doesn't sound much like what I've described above, you've been mistaking RPIs for something else, which might be why some folks here who -would- normally respond, are probably just scratching their heads wondering what you're talking about.

I think you're confusing game styles. RPIs are not turn-based. Your last paragraph indicates that you've played tried several RPIs - but there aren't several RPIs. There are only a few in existence. I think at last count, there were 5. RPI is an actual game designation - not a description of a type of roleplay. Although it doesn't identify a codebase, it does identify specific criteria; turn-based roleplay is not among that list of criteria.

Also, RPIs have no levels, death is permanent, and you don't kill mobs just because mobs exist. You kill mobs only if your character has some need to kill them. Such as - he's a hunter gathering skins for his crafting girlfriend. Or he's a paid mercenary escorting a group through dangerous terrain and protects them from the aggressive mobs that get in their way. Or you're learning how to kill creatures for those types of reasons, and need something to practice on, so you kill some less dangerous things, and sell their skins and meat and body parts in the markets, which gives you coin to afford food and water so you can continue thriving and ultimately achieve your goal.

In other words, the code exists so that players can work their characters into believable in-character goals; not so that characters can level up or get RPPs or stat boosts.

So if what you've been trying doesn't sound much like what I've described above, you've been mistaking RPIs for something else, which might be why some folks here who -would- normally respond, are probably just scratching their heads wondering what you're talking about.

I think you're confusing game styles. RPIs are not turn-based. Your last paragraph indicates that you've played tried several RPIs - but there aren't several RPIs. There are only a few in existence. I think at last count, there were 5. RPI is an actual game designation - not a description of a type of roleplay. Although it doesn't identify a codebase, it does identify specific criteria; turn-based roleplay is not among that list of criteria.

Also, RPIs have no levels, death is permanent, and you don't kill mobs just because mobs exist. You kill mobs only if your character has some need to kill them. Such as - he's a hunter gathering skins for his crafting girlfriend. Or he's a paid mercenary escorting a group through dangerous terrain and protects them from the aggressive mobs that get in their way. Or you're learning how to kill creatures for those types of reasons, and need something to practice on, so you kill some less dangerous things, and sell their skins and meat and body parts in the markets, which gives you coin to afford food and water so you can continue thriving and ultimately achieve your goal.

In other words, the code exists so that players can work their characters into believable in-character goals; not so that characters can level up or get RPPs or stat boosts.

So if what you've been trying doesn't sound much like what I've described above, you've been mistaking RPIs for something else, which might be why some folks here who -would- normally respond, are probably just scratching their heads wondering what you're talking about.

Oh, well thats nice to know. I honestly thought RPI was just what you called it where roleplay was mandated and heavily enforced. So what it non-optional Rp Muds called? RPM for Roleplay mandated?

There was some big and stupid debate a long time ago about nomenclature/terminology with no real resolution. I don't think anybody cares that much if "RPI" is a special term of art with a very special meaning, or if RPI just means exactly what the descriptive English words would indicate, or whether that's more properly called roleplay-enforced to avoid confusion with this very special term RPI that some people insist can only mean a certain set of features and a certain type of game.

It's pretty clear what OP means by RPI in this particular case by context, and his exploration of muds and the opinion he's asked people to give him hasn't been limited to the half dozen or so muds that deign to label themselves "RPI," nor has it been limited to level-less, permanent death muds, nor turn-taking or talk as you will muds, nor any other specific styles or features.

I don't think anybody is confused, scratching their heads trying to figure out how this guy's questions could possibly mesh with some limited set of features and games, termed "RPI," the definition for which everyone knows or ought to know only means the 5 games on the list of official RPIs, which necessarily must have permanent death, no levels, and no mob killing except as required for RP, but also no turn-taking when it comes to speech and actions.

There was some big and stupid debate a long time ago about nomenclature/terminology with no real resolution. I don't think anybody cares that much if "RPI" is a special term of art with a very special meaning, or if RPI just means exactly what the descriptive English words would indicate, or whether that's more properly called roleplay-enforced to avoid confusion with this very special term RPI that some people insist can only mean a certain set of features and a certain type of game.

It's pretty clear what OP means by RPI in this particular case by context, and his exploration of muds and the opinion he's asked people to give him hasn't been limited to the half dozen or so muds that deign to label themselves "RPI," nor has it been limited to level-less, permanent death muds, nor turn-taking or talk as you will muds, nor any other specific styles or features.

I don't think anybody is confused, scratching their heads trying to figure out how this guy's questions could possibly mesh with some limited set of features and games, termed "RPI," the definition for which everyone knows or ought to know only means the 5 games on the list of official RPIs, which necessarily must have permanent death, no levels, and no mob killing except as required for RP, but also no turn-taking when it comes to speech and actions.

I just figured that RPI was what the MU* scene was using these days to describe RP Enforced. If RP is mandatory in a game, I don't see what the difference is between that game and any other game that also mandates RP, whether it's mandatory but has permanent death, or mandatory but has penalized resurrections.

Some of the games require taking turns, and others don't. I was just asking what the advantage in the former is, and I posted the disadvantages I had observed.

People get really itchy about making a distinction between "roleplay enforced" and "roleplay intensive." You'll open a whole can of worms if you get into what is or isn't an "RPI," but try to keep an open mind regarding what's out there. I've found myself loving some muds I never would have thought to try back in my conceited days when I thought I knew what made the perfect game.

Well then, if the consensus is that RPI is an arbitrary word meaning whatever someone wants to assign to it, then I'll just state that the OP's post is asking about MMRs, not RPIs. With MMR meaning - mud, multi-roleplay. That's my arbitary term for it. And RPI, I have decided, stands for Random Puffball Interface.

Y'know, since these terms mean whatever someone wants them to mean, and has no actual significance. Oh and also - just for future notice: RPG - now stands for Rocks, Paper, and Graphics.

So just out of curiosity, is it more common now on RPIs (by which I mean not mushes or muxes...) to RP in turns, aka 'pose order'? Most muds I've RPed on (by which I mean, not mushes or muxes...;D) ignore turn-taking.

So just out of curiosity, is it more common now on RPIs (by which I mean not mushes or muxes...) to RP in turns, aka 'pose order'? Most muds I've RPed on (by which I mean, not mushes or muxes...;D) ignore turn-taking.

Well, If the phrase RPI means nothing, then who the hell knows. If we're talking about muds that adhere to the very strict criteria listed above (of which there are about five) no. Those muds are completely free form.

Well then, if the consensus is that RPI is an arbitrary word meaning whatever someone wants to assign to it, then I'll just state that the OP's post is asking about MMRs, not RPIs. With MMR meaning - mud, multi-roleplay. That's my arbitary term for it. And RPI, I have decided, stands for Random Puffball Interface.

Y'know, since these terms mean whatever someone wants them to mean, and has no actual significance. Oh and also - just for future notice: RPG - now stands for Rocks, Paper, and Graphics.

It's hardly arbitrary to take the words "roleplay intensive" and assign them a meaning corresponding with the English definition of those words. What's arbitrary is taking those words and assigning them a special, unique, term-of-art definition specific to a very select set of games and features not indicated by the English meaning of those words, and assuming everyone knows or ought to know that "RPI" means that and only that.

So just out of curiosity, is it more common now on RPIs (by which I mean not mushes or muxes...) to RP in turns, aka 'pose order'? Most muds I've RPed on (by which I mean, not mushes or muxes...;D) ignore turn-taking.

I've encountered some RP-enforced MUDs where there is a pose order, and people get very angry if someone goes out of turn.

I didn't intend for this thread to explode into a [new] discussion of proper game terminology.

This is what I propose: henceforth, all games which require role play at all times while on the grid are RP Enforced; all games which do not require role play while on the grid are Non-RP; and all games which encourage role play but will not cause trouble if you don't stay in-character are RP Encouraged.

I didn't intend for this thread to explode into a [new] discussion of proper game terminology.

This is what I propose: henceforth, all games which require role play at all times while on the grid are RP Enforced; all games which do not require role play while on the grid are Non-RP; and all games which encourage role play but will not cause trouble if you don't stay in-character are RP Encouraged.

That's pretty much how it is now. The only problem with it, is when people want to abbreviate, since both RP-Enforced and RP-Encouraged abbreviate to RPE. As for the whole "well if RPI people wanted their games to be exclusive, they should've made a better abbreviation when they created it" - at the time, they were the ONLY ones who wanted to call themselves RPIs, and so they did, and it stuck, and everyone who knew about the existence of any differences in the first place, knew what everyone meant when they used the term RPI. It was only after the fact that some games chose to call themselves RPIs, when they weren't like the games that had already been calling themselves RPIs, and everyone who knew about them recognized what that meant.

Sort of like criticizing people who call windows "windows" - just because windows is now the latest trendy word to describe a wall-hanging picture frame. Sure, you can call it a window. But it won't be that glass partition between the inside of your room and the back yard.

And sure, you can call your hack-n-slash mechanics game with 400 socials (or verbs, if you prefer), and levels and exp points that requires you to be in-character all the time an RPI, but it still won't be an RPI.

So the problem nobody thought to make a sticky somewhere explaining the meaning of all the jargon. Rendering all this talk just gobbledygook to any but the most in the know Mudders. So many problems can be solved via stickies. Tsk Tsk.

So the problem nobody thought to make a sticky somewhere explaining the meaning of all the jargon. Rendering all this talk just gobbledygook to any but the most in the know Mudders. So many problems can be solved via stickies. Tsk Tsk.

There's no need to permanently record something like that for future reference. It's just arrogance. "My mud isn't just roleplay-enforced. It's intensive and very realistic and the entire focus is roleplaying and I have a whole bunch of features to encourage that and took out a whole bunch of regular mud features to discourage anything but that. I need an entirely new term for this very special type of mud that separates me from the herd of other roleplaying muds that clearly aren't as intense. People shouldn't have to read the description of my mud to know that mine's special."

Fast forward a year or so to a mud that's extremely roleplay focused, but maybe doesn't have permanent death, or maybe allows for skill improvement and advancement through more traditional mud means, or maybe even has levels or OOC channels, and you get people going crazy. "That's not RPI! It's not as intense as my mud, because of this one thing they do differently, and I don't want people getting confused and thinking their mud is as intense as mine because they call theirs RPI."